Elizabeth, I forgot to mention that I like the photo of your living room. That's an awesome table you have, very '50s , very Charles Eames. I also see that "feather" again, the one behind glass leaning against the wall. Only now, I am guessing it's not a feather. So what is it? Some kind of leaf? Maybe from a fern? But it couldn't be - it's white! "No green, too much color", right? :) Well anyhow, you have great sense of style and I also like that you have your painting hanging over the fireplace. It's perfect for the setting. Life is art and art is life! I trust all is well, hope you are enjoying Summer. :):)
This part of the blog was begun last week and finished on July 1st :
I broke the rules tonight by watching a war movie. I did so because it starred John Agar, and in fact I found it simply by entering Agar's name in the Youtube search engine. "Jet Attack"(1958) was one of several titles that came back. Of the ones we hadn't seen, I chose "Jet" because it had Jets and was short, just 68 minutes. My work shedge-yoole is such that even an 80 minute movie is stretching things these days. Also, I just plain love short movies. Now that I'm hooked on 'em, it's gonna be hard for me to sit for a standard 120 minuter.
I was hoping for an entertaining Agar Extravaganza, but I needn't have bothered. As he did in "Daughter of Dr. Jekyll", he plays it straight. There's no sign of the patented Agar Arrogance. This is not to suggest he takes his role seriously, more that he's just going through the motions. Despite being directed by Edward L. Cahn, who made the classics "Invisible Invaders and "It! The Terror From Beyond Space" (the influence for "Alien"), "Jet Attack" is lifeless. It has a story, a plot, it has conflict, action and resolution, but it looks like it was made on autopilot by everyone involved. It's strictly Dullsville as a result, and after it ended I was surprised to learn that it's been called One Of The Fifty Worst Films Ever Made. I don't know that I'd go that far. It's not excruciating to sit through, ala "Mesa of Lost Women" or "The Incredible Petrified World". Instead I'd call it non-interesting.
In a nutshell, a scientist has devised a long range radar system that can cross the horizon. It will make short work of the Korean War. Both he and his invention are Top Secret, however, someone is aware of it, because the B-25 he is flying in is shot down over North Korea. I'd blame Kim Jong-un, but he wasn't born yet. Maybe it was his grandpappy. At any rate, the scientist is presumed dead, until a Russian spy (Noir actress Audrey Totter) gives word that he lived through the crash and was captured by Korean forces. Totter is a former lover of John Agar and is working as a double agent, friendly to the U.S. Agar, as Air Force Captain Tom Arnett, is sent in to make a rescue attempt. He and his men parachute across enemy lines and are met by a guerrilla leader who takes them to the hospital where the scientist is being kept.
After some cat-and-mouse intrigue, Agar's team locates the scientist and spirits him out of the hospital. Now all they have to do is escape North Korea. If captured, they'll be forced to watch Elizabeth Taylor movies until their eyes bleed. Fortune smiles upon them in the form of jets, sitting idle on an airstrip at the edge of a forest, but......wouldn't you know it, they're Russian MIGs.
"Anybody know how to fly these things"?, asks Agar.
They have no choice but to try. The MIGs are tricky but fast as hell, which helps them outrun some Chinese pilots in a final chase scene. The scientist is returned to Japan and taken to a U.S. Military Hospital, where he recovers, and his radar technology remains Top Secret. End of story. There's a lot of great stock footage in "Jet Attack", including aerial shots of F-86 fighters and MIG-15s, both bitchin airplanes. This might be a reason to see the movie if you're a fan of jets, but I can think of no other. Not even the presence of John Agar can save this one, which gets Two Thumbs Down. It's so boring that it took me a week to finish this review, as noted at the top of the blog. /////
Well let's see, what else can I tell ya? My latest book is "When Time Began" by Zecharia Sitchin. I inherited it from the estate of the late, great Dave Small. The book had been sitting on my shelf unread for many years, but as I am currently focusing on studies of ancient science and history, re: the Egyptians, Mesopotamians, Sumerians and the possible prior civilizations from whom they inherited their legacies, I thought it might have some interesting information. So far, it does. I'm only 100 pages in, but Sitchin is talking about Stonehenge and all of it's remarkable astronomical properties. He also mentions the age of the legendary megalith and states that it was built in three stages. The first stage was begun in 2800BC, and the thing is that the people who lived in England at that time - known as the Beaker People for their use of beautifully designed clay pots - did not have the technical know-how to construct the initial Stonehenge circle, and certainly would not have been able to measure, cut, and fit (not to mention lift) the massive stones into place for the later rings.
So, if the Beaker People didn't build Stonehenge, who did? That's what Sitchin is going to answer, and I have a feeling I know what he's gonna say, that it was the Annunaki, the Space Gods from Nibiru who are written about in The Necronomicon and other sources of Sumerian and Middle Eastern lore. Dr. Farrell talks about a similar "paleoancient" Very High Civilisation, as he refers to it, and while he doesn't go so far as to say they came from outer space (he doesn't commit either way), he does note that their knowledge of astronomy and building techniques indicates a science and mathematics that was superior to ours, and superior to that of Egyptian culture at that time.
So the question becomes, if the native Englanders (the Beaker People) didn't build Stonehenge, and if the Egyptians didn't build the Pyramids, who did? Furthermore, concerning the Great Pyramid at Giza, what was it's purpose? Was it really a tomb for the dead pharaoh? Dr. Joe says "rubbish". He says it was a weapon, and a very powerful one at that. Many folks might, upon hearing such an analysis, laugh and shake their heads, but the thing with Joseph Farrell is that he's not your garden variety "alternative" theorist. He's an Oxford-educated man of genuine brilliance who has the gift of explaining highly complex technical matters for the non-specialised reader. But I'm not here to justify Dr. Joe. He needs no help from me, anyone interested in his books can read them. All I'm saying is that he and Sitchin make convincing cases for their subjects. The thing that's most difficult to argue against is the measurements and alignments involved in both the Great Pyramid and Stonehenge. You'd have to have a knowledge of trigonometry that simply wasn't invented yet, not to mention an awareness of celestial orbits and motions that you'd have to be "off planet" to observe. Traditional Egyptologists don't want to deal with these facts, so they call it "pseudoscience". Ho hum. The evidence gets stronger with every passing decade, thanks to researchers like Farrell, Sitchin (who passed away in 2008) and Graham Hancock, not to mention Eric von Daniken, who began the whole Ancient Aliens phemonenon back in the late 1960s with "Chariots of the Gods".
So there you have it. That's my latest book. See you tonight at the Usual Time.
Tons of love. xoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxoxo :):)
No comments:
Post a Comment